Skip to main content

About your Search

20121108
20121116
STATION
MSNBC 20
MSNBCW 19
CSPAN 14
CNN 9
CNNW 9
CSPAN2 9
WHUT (Howard University Television) 6
FBC 2
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
CNBC 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 106
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 106 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the willingness to work with drawing lines in the dust, we get a different phenomenon. mitch mcconnell took a much harder line, and it really was he has a mandate for his failed policies. that is not what this election was about. anything that happens now asked to meet the approval of the house republicans, or it is not going anywhere. that i think is in many ways also a false bluster, because what we see going on in the senate is riling change that mcconnell does not necessarily control, which is 48 senators from across the board working with the fix that debt coalition and the business community to come up with a simpson-bowles template. there will not be a plan. >> what you see is the scenario for the link up? >> especially on the fiscal cliff? >> you will not see much difference between this on this. mort, i think it is impossible to write serious law during a lame duck that would constitute an agreement with any substance other than, and something set up behind them once again, to go into the fact if the next congress does not actually produce them. but the idea that they could do something t
from mitch mcconnell. he put out a statement. he's still minority leader. he left no doubt republicans will not be cooperating. it reads in part, the voters have not endorsed the failures or excesses of the president's first term. they have simply given him more time to give him the job they asked him to do together with the congress that restored balance. he's basically saying we won, you won. this is going to be a fight. i didn't see a lot of hope in that for negotiation. >> not only that, he started on a very -- hey, don't offer us anything that can't pass the house of representatives. >> what's that mean? >> well, that means we're starting from square one, apparently. john boehner today, he wants to not have any grand bargain before the end of the year. wants to do this -- they're just buying time. it will be interesting -- i'll be curious to see how the white house now reacts. you've got boehner and mcconnell, boehner is playing good cop, seems more conciliatory. mcconnell less so. mcconnell has a political squeeze happening on him because he's up for re-election in 2014. two thin
that was issued by mitch mcconnell, i personally found to be appalling. it was as if he hadn't taken any note of the election result whatsoever, and it spoke more of the continued intrans jens that have marked the last couple of years. in which direction is the gop going to go? the boehner path that's more con sill laer, let's get it done to avert a fiscal cliff or the mcconnell path. i hope it's the former and not the latter. >> you have boehner saying he's open to accept additional revenue. combine that on the other side with mcconnell as michael just pointed out and you have is there still a grover norquist impact, or has that evaporated or gone by the election? does that still exist, that pressure on republicans that sid signed in pledge. >> grover publicly stated that the american people did not vote for an increase in taxes. that they kept republicans in the house and the senate to stop any tax increases. so, of course, the pressure continues. john boehner is dealing tw two tensions. he's trying to explain to his conference they have to increase leverage. they don't want to see a middle
to call john boehner and mitch mcconnell but he was told they were asleep, quote after his speech, mr. obama tried to call both mr. boehner and the senate republican leader, mr. mcconnell but was told they were asleep. i realized it was late night and everything but if the president calls you and you are asleep, do you not get woken up? isn't that sort of a standing order? one of the things we can all agree on the sort of thing you get out of bed for? the presidents an on the phone, okay, i'll wake up and take the phone no matter who you are? no. john boehner and mitch mcconnell were still asleep and no woke them up. since then, they have made statements about what they see happening in this next year, indicating that maybe they also slept through the part of the night when the results of the election came in. mr. mcconnell put out a statement what's clear about this election is that the voters have not endorsed president obama's first term. the fact that the president won the election is not an endorsement of the president? filling in a little bubble next to the man's name on a piece
with the great. but there's another factor to keep in mind for 2014 are among those who are up in 2014, mitch mcconnell, john cornyn, lindsey graham, saxby chambliss. now, if you're mitch mcconnell and we've been sitting there for years ago we would have had unanimity that niche was keening of the republican party in kentucky. and that was not even a contest for who was the utterly acknowledged leader. and we get to the 2010 elections and he put every resource he could to every attempt, every string he could pull to keep rand paul from winning the republican nomination. and failed mr. luther if your looking at this from mcconnell's perspective, knowing that several other republicans who ran for the senate this time would not promise going in that they would support mitch mcconnell, and you know that you have the potential for a primary challenge at portage and no longer controlled, your willingness to compromise on some of these critical issues may be itself compromised. if you're john cornyn, you would've stayed out of the race for the republican nomination for the senate this time around, but you sat
this morning to a couple of republicans who said some things, [inaudible] mitch mcconnell and leadership could not push for enough amendments for votes on amendments like marriage or repealing health care or guns. republicans will push hard. >> how about six weeks on contraception in the highway bill. is that a pretty good start? do you remember that? >> it looks like there are motions to proceed. do you have any changes -- plans to change the filibuster? >> you ask the question, i am answering it. the rules have been abused and we're going to work to change them. a're going to make the senate meaningful place and we will make it so we can get things done so people who want boats on what you mentioned, six marriage and abortion, the american people are interested in doing something about the staggering debt we have. the election was pretty clear in a number of ways. the president campaigned around the country saying we know what the problems are. we just need some revenue. that was the issue. the mandate was, look at the exit polls and the polling. the vast majority of the american people, ric
will be greater but there's another factor to keep in mind for 2014. among those who are up to 2014, mitch mcconnell, john cornyn, lindsey graham, saxby chambliss. if you are mitch mcconnell and we have been sitting here four years ago we would have had unanimity that mitch was king of the republican party in kentucky and there was not even a -- for the utterly acknowledged leader and then we get to the 2010 elections and he put every resource he could and every attempt, it every string he could pull to keep rand paul from winning the republican nomination and failed miserably. if you are looking at this from mcconnell's perspective knowing that several of the republicans who ran for the senate this time would not promise going in that they would support mitch mcconnell, and you know that you have the potential for a primary challenge and a party you no longer control, your willingness to compromise on some of these critical issues may be itself compromise. if you are john cornyn you would have stayed out of the race in the republican nomination for the senate this time around but you sat back and w
done, much more so than mitch mcconnell, if he can get a deal done in the first six months, he's got health reform and putting the nation's fiscal house in order for the next three, four, five generations as the signature achievement already of his second term, that puts you in the league of some of the most successful presidents in our history. those are huge, big-time -- those are big-time accomplishments. >> he's got the opportunity. >> yes, that's what i'm saying. the door is open for him. >> he is going to have to strike some deals. >> he is. >> and he's going to have to make some grand alliances. >> i don't know anyone who knows speaker boehner who doesn't say a couple of things about him. one, pretty good guy. >> handsome. handsome. >> two, can cut a deal. knows how to cut a deal. and three, from that clip, joe, a guy who knows that he is one of the point people in leading a renewal of the republican party. he's got to cut a deal. he's got to cut a deal. >> but he doesn't have to cut a deal. that's the point and that's what the president and that's what the white house needs t
? the signs aren't clear. mitch mcconnell seemed to be saying no on tuesday, john boehner seemed to be saying possibly. so the issue is are they willing to move to the center on key issues? >> the books are being written but the chapters have yet to be lived out in a second obama term. ron suskin wrote in an op-ed for "the new york times" about whether obama can give the confidence americans need right now, focusing on legacy, which he goes on to say is the end game of the president and is often missing what's happened before his eyes. the great mishap of the first term is failing to direct. with a new president, a sky high approval rating, a sea of enthusiasts. with hindsight 2020, how will obama be different with legacy now in front of his mind? >> i actually think, in terms of legacy, he's going to have the legacy of bringing health care reform, which presidents have tried for a very long time, to fruition here in america, and he made a choice in doing that, and it probably was a choice that cost him some political capital because it came at the expense of some other things he might have d
is the meaning of his election? what were voters saying? mitch mcconnell said this is not a mandate to continue the excesses' of your first term. john boehner seemed more open to the idea of allowing more revenue, the rate increases on fiscal cliff issue. i think the president, and i know his left wing, is certainly holding him to the pledge on the campaign trail that he will let the proper rate expire at the end of the year and intends to hold his own in arguing for that. host: margaret talev, that brings up the mandate question. does he say what george w. bush said, i have political capital and i intend to spend it? guest: if you have it, use it, or what other people say it for you. right now, president obama's game is not to come out of the box, acting takeda, and give republicans -- acting cocky and giving republicans an idea -- a reason to want to stick it to him. he is saying let's get this done. that is what he is serious about, there is no reason to set yourself up as having more leverage than you do. host: margaret talev, and the go to this headline in bloomberg. what does he do on his
. the should be enough to deny president obama a mandate. mitch mcconnell made a statement saying the voters have not endorsed the failures or successes, simply given him more time to finish the job they asked him to do, together with a congress that restored balance to washington after two years of one-party control. now, not so fast. the actual number of votes cast for house seats favored the democrats by a half a million votes. this is no man dade for house republicans, but of course they're trying to swing a big stick again. there's a reason. republicans were able to capture more house seats with a majority of the vote. for example, look at pennsylvania in 2008. take a good look. where is the red? a lot of blue district, right? take a look at pennsylvania in 2012. wow. what happened? there's a lot more red. it's because democratic districts have been jerry mandered into unwinnable seats. you know, those republicans are pretty slick. reliability blue districts in the southwestern and southeastern part of pennsylvania were combined into comfortable red districts. real clear politics report
out maybe one year ago. and mitch mcconnell buried it. he did not want the information known. the news report is out there. i am sure you can find it. but mitch mcconnell was the one that buried it in did not want that publicly known that it is a fallacy. i want to ask, especially you, mr. representative, the last two years since you people have taken over, you have barely showed up for work. we are paying your salary. i do not see not one of you put any skin in this game. you are sitting there, you do not even show up for work for half of the two years of taken over. we are paying your salary, paying your benefits. i do not see you putting in the skin in the game. my my husband has been a steel worker. he has to work 60-to-80 hours a week. this notion of the 47% not paying taxes, and entitlement, my husband has been paid in into his benefits for 40 years. host: we will have the congressman respond, but let me ask you a question, what you think of increase in the age of people qualifying for medicare or social security? caller: my husband has been a steelworker for 37 years. my husband
to a generational thing. could either one of them make a deal stick within their caucuses? even if mcconnell and reid both tried to put something together, they have some exotic people on their side. you are absolutely right, and then toss in one more factor. you've got all the dysfunctional capitol hill, and then you have a president that basically has no relationship whatsoever with congress on either side. virtually no interaction with members of congress. wow. >> i don't agree with anything charlie just said. no, i agree with everything he just said. the key may be whether the president shows decisive leadership. i don't think decisive leadership necessarily is what he showed a lot of the time in the first term. not that he did not show any leadership. he did not get his hands really dirty. the public option fight we had, if you send it to may i will sign it. he let nancy pelosi take the lead on the public option, and on a lot of things. we knew what he preferred, but he did not twist arms. he just did not seem to get involved in the details. is he going to do that now? if he does that,
? [booing] >> next. next. you ask that question except to mitch mcconnell. >> you, mr. hoyer, mr. clyburn, you are all over 70. does it prohibit younger leadership from moving forward? >> so you're suggesting that everybody step aside? >> i'm saying it delays younger leadership. >> i think what you'll see -- let's for a moment honor it as a legitimate question. although it's quite offensive. the fact is -- the fact is is that everything that i have done in my almost -- i guess decade now of leadership, is to elect younger and newer people to the congress. in my own personal experience, it was very important for me to elect young women. i came to congress when my youngest child, alexandra, was a senior in high school, practically on her way to college. i knew that my male colleagues had come when they were 30. they had a jump on me because they didn't have -- i did what i wanted to do. i was blessed to have that opportunity to sequentially raise my family and come to congress. i wanted women to be here in greater numbers at an earlier age so that their seniority will start to count much so
work. speaker boehner, minority leader mcconnell, just for openers. shannon: next week they will have a meeting at the white house. there are so many issues cop the beginning of the year. there are 7 different categories of taxes that will expire. there are taxes associated with the president's healthcare law and a surtax on people. essentially in the words of someone i should cite. essentially they accuse the american people of voting for unknowingly or being uninformed for a $500 billion tax increase. they just vote for it. >> both republicans and democrats signed up for it it was a way of absolving themselves of the necessity of using judgment, discreet judgment and take responsibility so it created and i automatic mechanism called sequestration it's mind boggling the irresponsibility. it's no wonder politicians are rated oh low about it american public because both parties were performing horribly here. i was heartened to hear senator mcconnell say he didn't come to washington, d.c. to raise taxes. speaker boehner said he was waiting for the president's leadership. and of course t
regrated. >> rose: do you think the republicans are open to that idea? john boehner and mitch mcconnell. >> i've got to believe after this election they have to be open to that they have responsibilities beyond being political leaders and mitch mcconnell defined much of the last four years by saying his number one goal was to defeat barack obama. okay, that didn't work and now barack obama isn't going to run again so maybe hll co up with another priority like let's get some things done. and i think if he does take that position -- but it will take enormous compromises also by democrats to get things done because this is a big hole we've dug ourselves in. >> rose: do you think -- will the president be different these four years because of, a, things he learned in the first four and b, he does not have to run for reelection again? >> i think not having to run for reelection does give a certain freedom. no question about it. on the other hand, we all do live within the confines of reality and he is in a very political town with a majority of the house republicans-- which was what he had th
[inaudible] i wonder what you heard or have you heard anything from senator mcconnell on what his role will be. >> i hope he and speaker baners, in most things they work together, and i guess on fiscal reform, senator -- speaker boehner has taken the lead. but my view is if that -- again, if we hear some voices from the mainstream republicans in the country, particularly business, it would make it a lot easier for senator mcconnell to come to an agreement -- come to part of that agreement. >> sam. >> a broad question on how you see the democratic party entering this phase of governance. >> i'll answer the second question first. i think democrats, we've -- you know, why for instance -- i think we've gotten much better at focusing both our policies and our message on middle class folks. i think we understand the dilemma that the middle -- the middle class -- just take a step back. you know, the american dream is so much part of us. you know, i like to say that beautiful lady in the harbor in the city in which i live holds a torch. that's the american dream of every american and to most p
chairman, mitch mcconnell, john boehner, and other republican leaders behind the epic election failure of 2012 should be replaced with leaders more in tune with the conservative base of the republican party. likewise, established republican consultants establishedkarl rove, romney campaign senior advisers, and pollsters should never be hired to run or consult on a national campaign again. nobody would give a dime to the ineffective super pacs like american crossroads. the loss was the death rattle of the establishment republican party. the disaster of 2012 signals the beginning of the battle to take over the republican party and the opportunity to establish the gop as the party of small government, constitutional conservative. host: do you agree with that assessment? guest: not at all. k i do karl rove, the pollster for the romney campaign, and all the others he listed, the republican national chairman -- they are not the problem. the truth is, while i think the tea party is a great addition to the party, the candidates who were truly identified as tea party candidates in 2010 and 2012
hacking away and finally you had to pull the damn thing out? think of mitch mcconnell as that tree stump. there he is in the way of you cutting the lawn. he shouldn't be there. he's not growing. he's not getting any better. today mitch mcconnell did not signal, a big surprise, he was ready to compromise. the tree stump ain't moving. let's listen. >> the time for the president to lead is now, and that means offering a concrete plan that takes into account the fact that half the congress opposes tax hikes. not because we're selfish, not because we're stubborn, but we know it is the wrong thing to do. we know it will hurt the economy, and we know it will destroy jobs. >> you know, the nonsense behind that, guys, is that if you go by who we elect to congress deciding our national policy, then by that standard heidi heitkamp winning in north dakota means north dakota is a liberal state, and tester winning in montana means that's a democratic state or that mccaskill winning missouri -- no, that's not how we vote. we vote nationally for the president, and we have an electoral college to decide
's under way. the election was just yesterday. let's look at mitch mcconnell, the leader of the republicans in the senate. he's got a reelection in 2014. does he cooperate because he's up for reelection or does he not cooperate because he's worried about a conservative primary challenge? john boehner, the house leader, he might want to cooperate but he's got 230 plus republicans all of whom are taking a different message from this election, some of whom were reelected because they said they don't want to cooperate. the president's motivation, he wants to get this so-called fiscal cliff out of the way so he can work on the bigger issues nancy talked about: energy, immigration. so that's what motivates him. in the end, the players didn't change. the question is whether their motivations did. >> pelley: john, thank you very much. the big story in the northeast wasn't politics today but the nor'easter that just blew in. the same places that were swamped by sandy are getting lashed tonight by high winds, rain, snow, and an angry sea that threatens to flood the shoreline all over again. more evac
about the fiscal cliff right now, whether you're in the white house or your mitch mcconnell, which are trying to devise a some kind of cover for john boehner. the voters last night in the exit polls said that they're willing to take higher taxes but they think the government is too big. that's the deal that banner and obama almost got two years ago. so it's there. is within reach but dana has to be given some kind of cover that he can bring, 140 republican votes with him. it's going to be very difficult to do. obama will have to decide whether he wants to go off the cliff to give it up that preoccupation that we have with bush tax cuts, or whether he's going, the better passers, try to cloak into something big and mushy and do we like tax reform, and stretch it out and let the deal be massaged in such a way to increase revenue and more money for growth. anything to avoid that horrible road called a tax increase. but this is the hard work that is ahead. obama has got to make that decision. >> we heard the last panel toggle bit redistricting and its impact on partisanship, especially
. >> eric: another quick point. when you have john boehner and mitch mcconnell and mitt romney talking about immigration, immigration reform, it doesn't hold the water, the credibility when marco rubio or ted cruz or martinez does it, who has a better background and basis for making comments on it. that is why it -- >> bob: it's a question of policy. are they going to change policy? >> eric: they are the ones to do it. if you're romney with immigration reform. >> dana: in 1986, they passed the bill, the immigration bill because of the amnesty bill in 1986, republicans are the ones that passed that. ronald reagan signed it. republicans lost seats in 1988. i don't know if that is the right rabbit to chase. >> bob: they increased percentage among hispanics. >> andrea: i still say no, matter what, amnesty, free healthcare, student loans. give, give, give. g.o.p., no quick fix and it doesn't see a harvard professor to see where it's going. coming up, the main stream media may not be totally to blame for the republican losses this week but they weren't fair and balanceed in the reporting. what sho
they do and look to republicans in terms of how they handle the budget and the economy. >> mitch mcconnell and john boehner are heading into a budget summit meeting. you have 30 seconds to whisper in their ear. >> i thought you said you were going to go easy on me today. [laughter] can we keep going on like we have in the last several years? no. does that mainly have to do everything president obama wants them off -- that president obama wants? no. look at what are the ways to deal with that and what the composition of the election is looking at and what they want and how we can do some kind of compromise and still maintain our conservative principles. that is who we are as a party. >> ok, margie. your turn. you have harry reid's year or nancy pelosi or the president's here. 30 seconds. they are walking into the room. what is the one thing you would want them to know? >> one is getting tough when the republicans tried to fight compromise. been tough in a way that demonstrates and exposes -- being tough in a way the democrats -- demonstrates and exposes who is coming to the table. use langu
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 106 (some duplicates have been removed)